Perceptions of Social Support by Suicide Survivors and their Social Networks
Abstract
Current research tentatively suggests that families bereaved by suicide may receive and experience low levels of support. It is not clear, given the available data, whether there is a difference in the support given or in the support received, because no studies have systematically compared survivors with their social networks. Two groups participated in this investigation: survivors of a suicide in the family and members of their support systems. Each group completed objective scales of the social support that was offered or received by the members of the family as well as a scale of recovery from grief, and all participants were interviewed. Statistical analyses of the quantitative data indicated no differences between the groups, with the exception of a marginal trend suggesting survivors were rated less recovered by themselves than by members of their support systems. However, analysis of the qualitative data indicated that survivors believed that only other suicide survivors could fully understand them, and that they experienced implicit pressure from others to “recover” from their loss.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A number of smaller-scale qualitative studies have emphasised the importance of social and peer support in the aftermath of a suicide.
“As in the current study, a number of smaller-scale qualitative studies have emphasised the importance of social and peer support in the aftermath of a suicide [21], including Irish [36,37], North American [38,39], and Australian qualitative work [22].”
From Support Needs and Experiences of People Bereaved by Suicide: Qualitative Findings from a Cross-Sectional British Study of Bereaved Young Adults (2018) · cites this paper as [38]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 12 · Cited by 52
- Authors
- Wagner, K. G., & Calhoun, L. G.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
- Venue
- OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1992-02
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-73
- ISSN
- 0030-2228 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-3764
- OpenAlex
- W1994228729
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 5.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- OMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of North Carolina at Charlotte
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Keywords
- suicide survivors, social support, bereavement, grief recovery, family bereavement, social networks, perceived support
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review